Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Personally... Eh. Obviously John Kramer would not have fit as the premise of him being able to do anything a Killer can is stretching it already, and it'd be a complete character break for him to be doing what a Killer would in DbD, murdering people who already value their lives. Given the source material, it's honestly difficult to find the perfect candidates for the Survivor/Killer. Hell, even Doc Gordon ended up working with Jigsaw in like the later films, so it's hard to see him as the iconic Survivor.
I think the reason they picked David/Amanda was because they were trying to stay as far away from the excessive sequels as possible, which to be fair is probably the best way to approach a SAW adaptation. They based it around characters who have all needed details revealed by the 2nd movie to keep things minimal and stop you from having to watch all 7 (8 including the recent semi-reboot) in order to see all the necessary flashbacks to understand what the hell's going on.
Issue is, he disappeared after the first movie due to a lawsuit or something from the actor, and when he reappeared, he was reincorporated as one of Jigsaw's buddies. (at least from what I remember, the SAW sequels aren't exactly unforgettable classics to put it kindly) The main reason he is so famous is because they didn't, or rather couldn't, reveal what happened to him after the 1st movie ended, so "what happened to doctor gordon" practically became a running gag in interviews, until Saw 3D, aka Saw 7 eventually managed to reveal it. It's kinda difficult to have Gordon be iconic when he's absent for five movies in a row, or have him as the Survivor and Hoffman as the Killer, seeing as Gordon IS the guy who kills Hoffman at the end of the series. From Hoffman's perspective, Hoffman is the Survivor and HE'S the Killer, Gordon even goes so far as to wear a pig mask in that scene.
I do agree that the idea of Tenacity fits Gordon better than anyone else and it would've been neat if they called it "Gordon's Tenacity" kinda like how Franklin's Demise incorporates a different character from its respective movie. But making Gordon a Survivor would require people to go through pretty much the entire Saw series to fully understand his role, and he doesn't have a direct Survivor/Killer relationship with anyone except Kramer, and even that ended pretty fast.
TL:DR: I don't think there was a perfect candidate, not even Gordon/Hoffman. I think they chose Amanda/Tapp purely because they were the least complicated option- All you have to do is watch Saw II (and maybe the original if you really want to see amanda's introduction) and you understand everything, as opposed to having to watch pretty much the entire series for Gordon/Hoffman.
Also, while Gordon is indeed the guy who saws his leg off which is indeed the most famous scene from the movies (though amanda's reverse bear trap comes close), it's hard to argue that anything but the Jigsaw doll is the mascot of the series.
They needed another colored male survivor and another female killer (that isn't slow again).
That is definitely it.